Pages

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

I'm off to America today, and that probably means I won't have many chances to update this blog until I get back. It's possible there won't be any posts at all until mid-January. We'll see. Hopefully the weather will co-operate and everything else will go well, too.

But in case I don't get to post until I get back to New Zealand, Happy New Year.

Saturday, December 22, 2007

Episode 62 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

This is my last podcast for the year, so I start today by describing what a New Zealand Christmas is like for us. Then, I'll tell you a bit about my trip next week, and then after comments, I have a few special remarks.

It's now summer in New Zealand, so Christmas is very different than what I grew up with in Illinois (no snow or cold). The Christmas we have isn't necessarily the same as other Kiwis, but it's not all that different from theirs, either.

I have all my arrangements sorted for my trip to Chicago next week.

After comments, I have some special remarks for this last podcast of the year.

I probably won't have another episode until Tuesday, January 15, 2008. I'm hoping to be able to record some audio while I'm away, and maybe I'll be able to post it before I get home to New Zealand, but don't count on that.

Results for the poll question, “What's your favourite Christmas/Holiday special?”: A Charlie Brown Christmas was chosen by 5 people, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer by 2, Santa Claus is Coming to Town by 2 and None of these by 3.

Thanks for listening this year—I truly appreciate it! I'll be back with more in the New Year.

Leave a comment or send an email to me at amerinz{at)yahoo.com. You can also ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

The Japanese have announced that they won't hunt endangered humpback whales, after all—this year. They've left open the possibility that they may slaughter them next year or the year after.

The main reason the Japanese backed down, apparently, is the forceful opposition of Australia under its new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd. The Australians were sending a lightly armed fisheries patrol craft to gather evidence to take Japan to the International Court in a bid to halt the whale hunt.

Japanese broadcaster NHK first reported the move and quoted an unnamed official as saying, "Japan has decided to delist humpbacks from the whaling list for now due to concern about the negative impact on relations with Australia.” Australia was one of some 30 nations that lodged an official protest with the Japanese government.

New Zealand's Conservation Minister had earlier announced that New Zealand was participating in international diplomatic protests, and described killing whales for "so-called scientific research" as "abhorrent". This has long been New Zealand's position.

Japan was risking a lot by proceeding with hunting humpbacks. After Australia's strong support for the Iraq war, the US would have been honour-bound to back Australia in any diplomatic conflict with Japan. Japan also realised that it wasn't gong to get support from other Asian nations, leaving it little choice but to back down.

So, humpbacks have been spared slaughter for a year or two. This is good, but it's not enough. Japan must cease all whale hunting. It's illegal: Their so-called “scientific research” results in whale meat being sold in restaurants and supermarkets in Japan, which clearly indicates the purpose behind the annual whale hunt. And, Japan still plans on slaughtering around a thousand other whales.

Nations must continue and increase pressure on Japan. Maybe next year the Australian and New Zealand navies should schedule joint manoeuvres—just for research purposes, of course—in the area where Japan is hunting whales. Maybe then the Japanese government will begin to understand how much the rest of the world is opposed to their illegal whale hunting.

But in the meantime, well done Australia for having the courage to put pressure on Japan. This worked to end the most abhorrent part of the Japanenese whale hunt this year. To end the charade once and for all will require even more pressure. Are other nations up to the challenge?

Friday, December 21, 2007

Last night's earthquake wasn't felt in Auckland. There as no damage here, no injuries. Not this time.

I begin with and focus on that since I know that friends overseas are likely to hear about the earthquake, thanks, in part, to the availability of security cam footage showing stock flying off store shelves (and not in the good way). I've already been contacted by one friend, and I want to reassure all the others, too. What's the point of having a blog if you can't use it for that kind of thing?

The first I heard about the earthquake was just before I went to bed, when I decided to check the headlines on the Stuff andNZ Herald websites. “Massive earthquake hits New Zealand”, the headlines screamed. Came as a total shock to me because despite being felt in places along the eastern coast of the North Island and the South Island, too—apparently all the way to Christchurch—we felt nothing here. It was like reading about an earthquake in another country.

One day, there will a similar event in the Auckland region. It's not “if”, but “when”, although in Auckland's case it's possible, maybe even likely, to be caused by a volcano emerging. Wellington has similarly been waiting for “the big one”. Other regions face similar risks.

The point is that all of New Zealand is potentially at risk, and it's a general awareness we all have. But there's no predicting when a specific event will happen, and it's entirely possible that a catastrophic earthquake may not happen for many generations, so we all just get on with life.

The good news in this earthquake is that no one was killed and apparently injuries were minor. There was no risk of tsunami, either.

Even so, I doubt the residents and business owners of Gisborne will be feeling lucky this morning, at least not totally. All New Zealanders can relate, aware that it can easily be them next time. So I send my best wishes to Gisborne, and I hope they're able to re-open their Central Business District quickly so retailers and residents alike can quickly regain some sense of normality. Despite the risk, life goes on, as it must.

Update 22/12/07: Gisborne's CBD is open again, and early estimates are that there was $30 million in damage (today, about US$23,002,500). Meanwhile, scientists are saying the New Zealand is "overdue" for amd even bigger earthquake. How nice.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Not for the first time, a law has been shown to not have the dire consequences its opponents claimed.

This time, it's the so-called “anti-smacking” bill. The bill, which came into force on June 22, removed the legal defence of “reasonable force” from parents who smacked (or, more accurately, beat) their children. The far right campaigned vigourously against the bill, declaring that ordinary, “loving” parents would be hauled into court in the hundreds or thousands.

Well, they were wrong. Of course.

The New Zealand Police have just released a three month review of the legislation. The review found that there were 15 cases investigated in those first three months, resulting in nine warnings being given, and no prosecutions. Police Commissioner Rob Pope said, "While this is only a three month snapshot I am confident that police are taking the same common sense approach to these events as we always have, with officers using their discretion to ensure the appropriate action is taken."

Predictably, the far-right christianist group that opposed the law in the first place have a different view, calling the review misleading. In the double-speak that's typical for them, they claim that there are far more than an average of roughly one case per week being investigated, implying that many more than that are being “targeted” and filled with “trauma and fear of police investigation”.

Then they switch gears and say that if it was only 15 cases in three months, why did the government enact the changes? So they claim the changes unleashed hordes of police preying on “good parents or grandparents,” but if it didn't, well, then it's useless because it's resluted in so few investigations. Clearly it both can't be true.

The group is promoting a petition “demanding Referendums [sic] on smacking and addressing the real causes of child abuse.” And we all know what that is, don't we? Those bloody homos demanding the right to marry!

Okay, so it's not just that, to them it's abortion and other things that the far right christianists hate, too. But they don't talk about their far right religious agenda when they talk about public issues, probably because they know that few New Zealanders agree with them. And part of the evidence for that is that I had to go out of my way to read their comedy writing press release about the police review: The mainstream print media didn't cover it in the initial stories I saw.

The passage of the amendment was a sign of progress in New Zealand. If the mainstream news media are starting to ignore the bleating of the far right extremists, then that confirms progress is happening. And all without a smack in sight.

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Whenever I see the top searches on Yahoo!, I have the same hope that they aren't in any way related. They aren't, right?

Update: When I posted this originally, I forgot to put a title on it (doh!). Actually, I had one, but "Peter Jackson and Ron Paul's implosion videos of Dancing with the Stars' Christmas movies and dinner recipes, with Leah Remini, Koenigsegg CCX and Ludacris and P.S. I love you" was way too long. But now that I've said all those things, they're bound to show up in future Yahoo! search results, too. Oops!

Episode 61 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

This is the last chance I'll have for a political podcast before my big trip, and that also means it's the last chance to talk politics before the Iowa Caucuses or New Hampshire Primary. Jason joins me today as we talk about events in the campaigns, including Romney and Huckabee trying to out fundamentalist each other. Aren't they promoting a religious test for public office? Huckabee gets a a good look today, both for his call for quarantine of people with HIV/AIDS and is “fair tax”, which we think is anything but. A look at opinion polls and we wrap up for the day. I have a couple comments, a replay of my pretend commercial, and that's it. Friday will be a normal podcast, and will probably be my last until January.

Friday, December 14, 2007

Episode 60 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

My last episode was ten days ago. I start today to tell you why that is: I've been incredibly busy with work. I have a big trip coming up, and that will again mess up the podcast schedule. In the meantime, I'll have another political episode next week. Today I give some advice to would-be expats.

Then I go over comments, the results of a recent poll on my blog and finally, I talk a bit about Australia's new Prime Minister.

Leave a comment or send an email to me at amerinz{at)yahoo.com. You can also ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Saturday, December 08, 2007

I'm not joining the chorus of people who seem to be giddy that new Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has said his government won't stand in the way of Australian states and territories recognising same sex relationships. It's actually little better than the situation under defeated right wing Prime Minister John Howard.

Rudd said, "On these matters, state and territories are answerable to their own jurisdictions. State and territory governments are elected to govern, they are accountable to their constituents.''

Fair enough. But Rudd, who during the campaign said he's opposed to federal marriage or civil unions for same sex couples, apparently wants these registries to be limited to residents of that one state. So, a couple in one state would have to register all over again if they move to another state or territory. Moreover, due to the likely variety of structures and benefits, state registrations, unlike a federal union, may not be recognised by foreign countries that recognise same-sex unions, like New Zealand.

Already, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) has announced it will delay introducing its civil union registry after a meeting between the ACT and Commonwealth attorneys general. Now, it appears that ACT have a weak register than originally planned.

In Victoria, the state government is moving to establish a “Relationships Register” which they think will somehow make it easier for same-sex couples to claim benefits. Victorian Attorney General Rob Hulls said "The Relationships Register will offer conclusive proof of a relationship with one certificate.” He says, for example, couples won't have to prove a relationship in the event of a medical emergency.

Make no mistake: This is progress. But if a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, this is the equivalent of beginning to lift the foot. Of course Rudd's government should be applauded for ending the blatantly partisan meddling on the issue practiced by Howard's government. Without real and meaningful legal recognition, however, it will end up satisfying no one, least of all the couples who are waiting to be treated as ordinary citizens.

This isn't about the word “marriage”, but about the legal rights and privileges that all citizens and taxpayers are entitled to as a fundamental human right. Call it whatever you want, but make it fair and just. Come one, Rudd, advance Australia's fairness.

Friday, December 07, 2007

I've been absolutely buried in work and just haven't had the time to record a podcast today. So, sorry, but there's no episode today. I'll be back on Tuesday with a nice, fresh episode. In the meantime, if you're desperate to hear me, head on over to ArcherRadio, where I took part in his latest group show (episodes 583 and 584).

While I'm on the subject of absences, we have a busy weekend ahead, including a family birthday party tomorrow. That means there probably won't be any blog posts until next week either. Life happens.

Thursday, December 06, 2007

One lesson that politicians never seem to learn is that when they find themselves in a hole, they should stop digging. Somewhat unusually, John Key, leader of the opposition National Party, has found himself in that situation.

Key was a critic of the use of politicians' families to score hits during debates in Parliament. Personal attacks and smears have no place in political discourse, he declared.

That was then, this is now.

Key's found himself in the firing line over his use of MPs' families as well as a not-too-subtle attempt to remind people that Prime Minister Helen Clark has no children. On this morning's Breakfast programme on TVNZ, Key was given the opportunity to acknowledge that he had done the same sort of thing he criticised. Of course he didn't do that.

Interviewer Paul Henry pointed out at least twice that Key was avoiding a direct question, but he nevertheless failed to admit he was now no better than anyone else. Henry is no friend of Labour, having openly expressed his contempt for the Government, but he's an even stronger opponent of hypocrisy, in all its forms.

For their part, Key and National are downplaying the matter, saying you have to have a sense of perspective. No, you don't: If that sort of behaviour is wrong, it's always wrong, not okay because it's not as bad as the behaviour of others. This is a breathtaking display of moral relativism from the party supposedly based on conservative values.

Make no mistake: I absolutely agree that no politician should be engaging in personal attacks, and that MPs' families should never be used just to score political points. On the Labour side, I often find myself wishing that the Caucus would put duct tape over the mouth of Trevor Mallard (maybe with a tight-fitting ice hockey goalie's mask, too). He's been one of the worst offenders of “attack dog” politics.

But that doesn't excuse Key's behaviour. He was wrong. If he wants to claim any sort of “moral highground” on this, he'll have to stop doing it, first, and apologise for having descended to that level.

In the meantime, he should stop digging. And he can no longer throw stones, either.

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Episode 59 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

It's now one month until the first real votes will be cast in the US Presidential candidate selection process, so I'm joined again today by Jason for a talk about all that. What's up with Huckabee? Is his star rising at Romney's expense? And does Romney stand for anything? On the Democratic side, the media should be more responsible in talking about falsehoods, especially those directed at Obama. Will Obama be hurt by such an early Iowa Caucus? Does the media shape what the campaign is about? In future episodes we'll talk about candidates and the campaigns as events unfold. I recorded this early because I knew I'd be too busy to record this week.

Also, I'll soon be attending a candidate selection meeting here in New Zealand for our elections, which are also next year. I'll talk about that in an upcoming episode. Comments and the expat briefing will be on Friday.

Leave a comment or send an email to me at amerinz{at)yahoo.com. You can also ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Monday, December 03, 2007

One of the new words I learned when I arrived in New Zealand was “gobsmacked”. It means being utterly astounded, completely surprised. I think it's of British origin, but wherever it comes from, it's not something I ever encountered in Middle America.

But that's the way it is when you move far away, and especially to a new country: You learn new words and phrases, encounter new traditions and ideas, new ways of doing things and new attitudes. Sometimes that can be pretty bewildering, but for me it's been all good.

So I was gobsmacked to watch the news tonight and learn of an American expat living in Christchurch who's set up a website to, well, trash New Zealand. Okay, that's not actually their stated goal, but it's the end result. Contributors call New Zealanders uncouth, racist, bigoted—the litany of complaints goes on and on.

What's the deal? How can my experience be completely the opposite of theirs? There are a number of explanations.

First, Christchurch. It has a lot of unflattering nicknames, the “whitest city in New Zealand”, the “most English city” (by which they mean stuffy, uptight and, well, racist). Like all stereotypes, there's an element of truth: Christchurch has long had a problem with racist skinheads, for example. But it's also a city in which the central electorate is represented by an MP who's a gay man and an English immigrant.

Next, there's cultural misunderstanding. The humour in this part of the world is far more direct than Americans are accustomed to—in fact, many Americans find it bitchy and become easily insulted. It's easy to assume that this humour reveals a darker attitude that it simply doesn't.

There's also the possibility of lack of preparation, such as research, and many of the contributors to that site admit this. But it's equally possible that some of them simply were never cut out to be immigrants in the first place—not here, possibly not anywhere. There's no shame in that, but a little more careful research might have helped prevent their obvious unhappiness.

I cannot stress strongly enough that my experience is nothing like these people have apparently had. But that doesn't mean that I don't see problems. There certainly is prejudice based on race or ethnicity, especially against Asians, Maori and Pacific Islanders. But in my experience even this isn't commonplace. I come from a land where racism is rife. I know it when I see it, and I've simply never seen true racism in New Zealand.

In the end, I think that it comes down to the “space” someone is in: When one is unhappy, possibly bitter or angry, too, it's not easy to see the world in anything but a negative way: Negativity tends to breed more of the same. Believe me, I know about that, too.

My advice to anyone contemplating becoming an expat is: Be real, do hard research, and look for reasons not to emigrate. If your desire survives all that, you may be on to something. And remember that if you find expat sites filled with people who are overly positive or overly negative, that site is unlikely to give you a realistic view of your chosen home. On that one thing, I do agree with that negative site: Let the buyer beware. If you are, you're more likely to make the right choice and you'll leave no one gobsmacked—including yourself.

Sunday, December 02, 2007

The Human Rights Campaign is a group I've often criticised, but I believe that when they do something right, I should give them credit.

HRC staged a protest in Washington, DC, placing one small American flag on the Mall for every soldier discharged from the military during the 14 years of the infamous “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” (DADT) policy designed to exclude gay and lesbian soldiers:HRC placed 12,000 flags.

Strong winds meant they had to concentrate the display in a smaller area, with fewer flags, but the result was still impressive.

My friend Jason, who lives in DC, snapped some photos while he was out and about, and posted them on his blog. I particularly liked this one because you see that helicopter in the background by the Washington Monument? That's Marine One, which carries the President—you know, the moron sitting in the White House who thinks throwing away 12,000 soldiers is a great policy. You will also no doubt remember what a hard time the US military has had finding Arabic speakers because DADT meant they were forced to discharge most of the soldiers who were Arabic-speaking language specialists.

DADT came in during the presidency of Bill Clinton, but that was then, this is now. The neocons and theocons in the current regime love DADT, and it's highly unlikely the policy would be changed if the Republicans are in power after the 2008 election. The Democrats would be far more likely to change it.

If there's a chance to stop such a stupid policy—one which has no equivalent among US allies—then I know who'll I'll be backing. I know, you didn't ask, but I'm telling: I'll be voting for the Democratic candidate. DADT is just one of many reasons.

Well done, HRC, for an effective protest (and great pictures, Jason!).

Saturday, December 01, 2007

Last year, I wrote an angry post for World AIDS Day. In the year since, nothing has happened to reduce my anger. This year, indignation is added on top.

George Bush—my second least favourite American, after Dick Cheney—has announced he wants the US Congress to approve US$30 billion to fight AIDS. He said: “We dedicate ourselves to a great purpose: We will turn the tide against HIV/AIDS—once and for all. I look forward to seeing the results of America's generosity.”

Let me put this as generously as I can: Bush is a hypocrite. US money spent on AIDS prevention can't be spent on condoms; it must be spent to promote abstinence. How dare he make it sound like he will help fight HIV/AIDS when he and his far-right christianist buddies forbid any meaningful efforts that really would fight it?

Mind you, money spent to ease the suffering of people with the disease would be a good thing, but wouldn't it be better still to work to prevent the infection from happening in the first place? Or maybe that's too logical, too sensible.

After seven years of this regime's lies, deceptions, criminal activity, profiteering and wholesale slaughter of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, it's natural to assume their motives are dark. They apparently do nothing that doesn't enrich their buddies or advance the theocon/neocon agenda. They certainly don't care about combatting HIV/AIDS at home, and not really in Africa, either.

On the bright side, there's only one more World AIDS Day with that man occupying the White House.

The news media reported tonight that some 5,000 people marched in Auckland against the Electoral Finance Reform Bill, currently before Parliament. The organiser is John Boscawen, usually called “a businessman” by the media. What kind of businessman—apart from, apparently, right wing?

Prominent participants included the leader of the neo-conservative ACT Party, the leader of a new far-right christianist party connected to a NZ TV preacher and the leader of the far-right christianist group that was the centre of organising against the anti-smacking bill (and now engaged in organising boycotts of advertisers on “Californication”, among other far-right christianist causes).

So, who are these people? Are they merely a gang of political extremists worried that they can't buy the next election? Some of the signs carried referred to “Helengrad”, a favourite schoolyard taunt used by the right and far right in New Zealand.

The original purpose of the bill was a response to a far, far-right christianist sect that spent more than a million dollars in the 2005 election on a smear campaign against the Labour and Green Parties in an effort to get the National Party elected. The group spent the money secretly, never openly identifying themselves until their true identities were revealed by an ex-member.

Another aspect of the bill will severely limit fat-cat campaign contributions and outlaw anonymous donations through trusts, a despicable practice that allows very, very rich people to donate huge sums to a party without their names being known publicly (very useful for rich business owners whose customers may not approve of their political donations). This has benefited primarily the conservative National Party and they will suffer the most from the changes.

Some proposed changes have been criticised by disinterested parties, and the government plans to deal with those objections through amendment. But the level of heat among opponents, the level of venom hissed at the Government and at the Prime Minister in particular seems out of proportion.

Which leads me to wonder if there isn't a larger agenda at work here, especially given who some of the high-profile opponents are. This looks to me to be another aspect, basically, of neo-conservative efforts to get a National Party-led government in order to promote their full agenda. If they really are ordinary people, and not far-right ideologues trying to appear ordinary, they could go a long way to reduce my suspicions by simply turning down their volume and using normal discourse, not the screeching rhetoric of the Grumpy Brigade.

Unless that happens, I'll keep wondering who these people really are.

Update: The Green Party has revealed that the leader of the protests is also a member of the neoconservative group, Business Rountable (previously, commentor Downunder Mark documented that he was a chief fundraiser for the neoconservative ACT Party--thanks for the info, Mark). Members of the Business Roundtable raised huge piles of secret cash for the National Party in the 2005 election. The donations were secret only to voters, since the money was given anonymously through trusts, but it's likely that National's top leaders knew who the big donors were.

Friday, November 30, 2007

Episode 58 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

I have a lot of work to do right now, so this is just a short catch-up episode.

Differences are emerging following the Australian election. Australia plans on withdrawing combat troops from Iraq by the middle of next year (New Zealand has never had combat troops in Iraq). The new government also plans to formally apologise to Aborgines for the Stolen Generation, something that defeated Prime Minister John Howard steadfastly refused to do.

In talking about the Aussie elections, I compared Australia with New Zealand and I said that it was more likely that New Zealand's Labour Party would be better positioned to form government than the National Party because Labour has more potential coalition partners. The next day, the New Zealand Herald published a front page story claiming that a new poll had found that if the election were held then, the National Party would win enough seats to govern alone—but does it really mean that? A week and a half earlier, a poll from rival Fairfax Media showed Labour up and National down.

All opinion polls are mere snapshots of one fleeting moment, but some are more worthy than others. For example, in the US the mainstream news media made a big deal out of a Zogby poll that claimed to show that Hillary Clinton would lose to any Republican. However, the poll was a worthless online poll and a Gallup poll released about the same time showed the opposite—that either Clinton or Obama could beat the Republicans. The Gallup poll was a real poll and had credibility, but the mainstream news media ignored it.

Since I'm an expat, it makes sense I should talk about that, so on Fridays I'm going to give you the Expat Briefing, telling you one thing about being an expat that I haven't really talked about before. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have, too.

Stuff.co.nz had one of their silly online polls asking “where is the most inappropriate place to text?” The options were, a funeral, the movies, a meeting, driving in the car, a place of worship, a public toilet, in front of the queen.

And where do Stuff readers think is the more inappropriate place to text? A funeral won all day long. Personally, I would've thought that texting while driving was a wee bit more inappropriate (or, at least, stupid), but no.

The context for this is that the Grumpy Brigade has been beating up on Prime Minister Helen Clark for supposedly sending text messages during the Queen's speech to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). Have you ever heard any of those speeches? Texting could provide some blessed relief.

At any rate, “In front of the queen” was thought to be the second most inappropriate place to text by Stuff readers who took part in the poll, which just reinforces the image of people who answer Stuff polls as having massive chips on their shoulders, waiting for any and every opportunity to stick it to the Prime Minister and the Labour-led Government. They're the Grumpy Brigade. They're also pretty thick, apparently.

As for me, I vote for whatever position I know will be opposite to the majority (whether I actually hold the position or not), and I do it from multiple computers just so I can mess with the results. I have utter contempt for online and phone-in polls, especially when the media pretend they have any validity whatsoever. This is my way of gaming the system.

Now, anyone have the Queen's cell number so I can text her from a funeral?

Thursday, November 29, 2007

The directory assistance calls for New Zealand are to be outsourced to the Philippines, with a loss of about 100 New Zealand jobs. To me, this is just another corporate arrogance and greed.

Directory assistance is one aspect of the directories business that Telecom New Zealand sold last March for $2.24 billion to a private equity consortium. All entities that have “private equity” in their description seem to have greed as their mission, in my opinion. Generally speaking, private equity firms seem to be interested only in the maximum profit they can achieve, even if that means stripping all the assets out and destroying the company they bought.

I don't happen to believe the Yellow Pages Group's propaganda that New Zealand customers will have great service, and I definitely don't for one second believe that outsourcing to another country will provide service superior to what is available here in New Zealand. I don't think many New Zealanders do.

It's not just about language, though I think that will be a problem. It's also about culture, about understanding slang and idiom and all the other things you can't learn in a training course. A technical help desk is one thing, but telephone directory service is a different animal.

Maybe another company will enter the market, offering New Zealand-based directory service as their point of differentiation. Personally, I bet it'd be superior to any foreign service.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Episode 57 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

The Australian election was held this past Saturday, and the changes were huge. But for GLBT people, the changes may not be so big. I also tell you a few more things about being an expat. Then, it's on to comments, including an audio comment from Nik-in-Paris, then the results of the latest poll on my blog. Finally, a listener tells me about a new sweepstakes where US listeners can enter to win a trip to New Zealand.

The results from my latest blog poll are in, answering the question: Regardless of what you actually have, do you think Christmas is better in hot weather or cold? Among 22 responses, 2 people or 9% favoured Hot weather, Cold weather was chosen by 15 (68%), I don't care by 3 (13%) and “What's this, a trick question promoting New Zealand summer?” by 2 (9%).

Today the President visited the White House: Al Gore, the man who won the 2000 US Presidential election, was at the White House occupied by the man who lost, only to be installed in the office by the US Supreme Court. As surreal moments go, this is pretty high on the list.

Gore was visiting as one of the American Nobel Prize winners. I wish the visit would help remind people that Bush was installed as president after bad rulings from the Supreme Court and after what can charitably be called “irregularities” in the way that Republicans ran the 2000 election in Florida. That's not likely.

It's natural to suspect that the Republicans have been operating a vote suppression agenda, trying to manpulate laws to suppress votes from probable Democratic-leaning voters (the “Real ID” act for example), and following the politically-motivated firing of US Attorneys who weren't sufficiently aggressive in prosecuting (persecuting is a better word) Democrats for imaginary “voter fraud”. The hit man in that effort, Alberto Gonzales, is still under US Justice Department investigation amid charges he lied to Congress, a criminal offence. Gonzales' neocon allies have set up a “defense fund” to raise money to pay his legal bills.

My own bet is still that eventually several members of the Bush Administration will be convicted of various crimes, and my hope is that some will go to prison. I also suspect that had the man elected in 2000 actually been sworn in, none of that would be the case.

Meanwhile, there was great news today that arch-homophobe Republican Senator Trent Lott will retire from the Senate in January. The far-right Lott lost his job as Majority Leader when he made statements supporting racial segregation championed by Strom Thurmond. Though he back-pedalled furiously when the news broke, nothing could save Lott when even Bush couldn't overlook it. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Monday, November 26, 2007

As soon as the results of an election are known, the pundits swoop in to declare what it all means. They can't help themselves, but sometimes I really wish they would.

Most of the mainstream media on both sides of the Tasman have been focusing on concrete things, like Prime Minister-elect Kevin Rudd ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. This pledge earned him an invitation to a UN meeting on climate change in Indonesia, which Australia had been banned from because of Howard's intransigence on Kyoto.

The Australian media have also been speculating on who Rudd will appoint to cabinet, while being fascinated that Australia will have its first female Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard (when Rudd is in Indonesia, she will be Acting Prime Minister, the closest Australia has gotten to a female Prime Minister).

In New Zealand, which has had two female Prime Ministers in a row, the reaction to the Rudd election has been positive. In particular, the Prime Minister must be looking forward to having a neighbour and close ally working on climate change and an agenda very similar to her own party's.

The only silliness on this side of the Tasman has been from amateur pundits or, predictably, the Opposition. The song goes something like this: Both Howard and Clark have been Prime Minister of their respective countries for around a decade, both are formidable campaigners and forceful leaders of their governments, and in both countries the Opposition led in the polls after changing leaders. So, therefore, Helen Clark will be toppled.

This is utter nonsense—and wishful thinking on the part of the Opposition and the Grumpy Brigade (made up of people who like to complain about Labour and Helen Clark almost reflexively).

First, the obvious: The two countries are separate and different. In 1996, Australia's Labor Government was defeated by Howard's conservatives. That same year, New Zealand re-elected a conservative Government led by the National Party. New Zealand's Labour Government wasn't elected until 1999.

A year is a long time in politics. The Opposition imagines it can go through an entire year without making a single mistake, without someone in their caucus saying something stupid. Those are pretty incredible assumptions.

Which is not to say that Labour will be reelected; again, the election is about a year away. Labour can do or say something stupid, too, of course. But no one should write Labour's obituary yet, and for one very good reason: Labour has plenty of options for coalition partners, but National would probably have to win enough seats to govern alone, and no party has been able to do that since elections under MMP began in 1999.

There was certainly a high level of anti-Howard voting going on, but it's simplistic in the extreme to suggest that was the only motivator. Australian voters simply liked Labor's message better. That's the way elections work: The party that best presents what voters want will win.

So, the results in the Australian election mean nothing for New Zealand (or the US presidential elections either, for that matter). Not that that will stop the pundits from trying to say it does mean something. They can't help themselves.

Update 28/11/07: A new poll published today by the New Zealand Herald claims that if the election were held right now, the conservative National Party would win enough votes to govern alone. The story was splashed large on their front page (no surprise, that), but despite the hype, it doesn't really mean what the Herald implies since Labour was barely down and National was barely up. They could also probably use a gentle reminder: The election is still a year away and any poll numbers today won't stay the same. The only thing that was interesting about the poll results was the sudden drop in support for the Green Party. If that continues, it could possibly indicate trouble for the Labour-led government—a year from now.

Sunday, November 25, 2007

Australian voters ended John Howard's eleven and a half years as Prime Minister and brought in the Australian Labor Party (ALP) and its leader, Kevin Rudd, to form a new government. Howard's conservative Coalition was first elected not long after I arrived in New Zealand.

Howard's concession speech ended on a gracious note, after earlier partisan jabs, saying "I wish the government elected by the people today the very best of good fortune in the years ahead." Earlier in the speech, he said "I accept full responsibility for the Liberal Party campaign and I therefore accept full responsibility for the Coalition's defeat in this election campaign." Some pundits have said that having to campaign in his own electorate seat took his attention away from the national campaign and marginal seats that the ALP ultimately won. In the end, Howard appears certain to have lost his own seat, too.

The issues that defeated Howard's government were varied, including Howard's unpopular labour laws, inaction on climate change and other issues. Howard attempted to frighten Aussie voters into supporting the Coalition, but unlike previous years the effort fell flat. The ALP's commitment to an “education revolution” also interested many voters.

In his victory statement, Kevin Rudd said “I will be Prime Minister for all Australians.” In the campaign he said Howard's labour laws will be reformed, and his first action will be to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.

For the US, this means the Bush Administration has lost its last staunch supporter among major allies. Australia will withdraw its troops from Iraq. Also, the US will be completely isolated on climate change, both through its continued refusal to act in any meaningful way, and especially through its refusal to ratify Kyoto.

I doubt there'll be any change in the relationship between Australia and New Zealand.

Gay and lesbian Australians won't be played as pawns by the ALP, but I don't expect to see any dramatic favourable change. Howard's government moved to outlaw same-sex marriage (as a wedge issue in electoral politics), and consistently prevented the establishment of civl unions. There's unlikely to be any change on marriage, but states may at least get the power to create civil unions if they want to.

I was never a fan of John Howard or his right-wing government. I'm not sorry to see either go. But to me, the greatest thing is watching democracy in action. Last night we stayed up until around 1am (NZ time), until Rudd's speech was aired, watching the change as it happened. I know that'd be the height of boredom to many people, but for me witnessing the power of democracy is something I'll watch any time I can, especially if it affects me in some way (and what happens in Australia always affects New Zealand).

I have to admit, though, I always like democracy just a little bit more when I agree with election results. This morning, democracy is a close friend of mine.

Friday, November 23, 2007

Episode 56 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Today I mostly tell you about my odd Thanksgiving Day in New Zealand, which was unusual, even for me. This gives me a chance to tell you about Auckland's poor public transport system. The US Ambassador to New Zealand is a good one. Then there's a visit to The Commonwealth: It suspended Pakistan until democracy is restored. Then, the Queen visited Uganda to open the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, and visited people with HIV/AIDS. Finally, there's even something about the Australian elections, which will be held tomorrow. No comments today, but those will return on Tuesday, along with a wrap-up on the Australian election.

To me, there's no time when expats are more likely to miss their homeland than at the holidays. Which holidays those are will vary from person to person, depending on their circumstances, background, and so on. For me, without a doubt that holiday is Thanksgiving.

Maybe that sounds weird. After all, I'm exactly where I want to be. I have a great life filled with love and happiness and I really don't want anything—I am home. And yet this one day, uniquely among American holidays, makes me keenly aware of what I don't have or, more accurately, what I have to recreate in a distant land.

The thing I think is weird about it is that Thanksgiving has really mixed memories for me. I have wonderful, happy and vivid childhood memories, complete with smells, tastes, sights and sounds, but I also have tragedy: My father died on Thanksgiving Day many years ago, shortly after my mother had been diagnosed with cancer.

In the years after my parents' passing, Christmas became a whirlwind of visits to partners' families or my own, when what I really wanted was to celebrate at home. Eventually, I came to care less about that as I cared less about Christmas itself. But Thanksgiving remained because it was more likely to be the holiday we could spend at home.

Then I moved to New Zealand, where Thanksgiving is a curiosity at best, and unknown at worst.

Some years, I would try and approximate a Thanksgiving dinner using local ingredients for the American ones I couldn't get. One year Nigel and I went to Denny's because on their menu, largely the same as in America, they had “Turkey Dinner”, which was an okay American diner-style version. I think a couple years I basically ignored the holiday, since it was just another Kiwi work day.

In recent years, Thanksgiving has mattered more to me than it did in my early years here. Maybe that's me reconnecting with my roots, or maybe it's that I'm so comfortable and secure in my “Kiwi-ness” that I can add back the one American tradition that I now find matters very much to me.

But I also think it doesn't do anyone any harm to spend one day a year reflecting on what one is thankful for, and that's part of what my Thanksgiving is. For me, that also means being thankful for what I no longer have, like my parents. I don't feel sad that they or others are gone, but grateful that I had them at all (and not just because I wouldn't be here if my parents hadn't been). Thanksgiving, then, is a celebration of all that's good about life and being alive.

There's one thing I've never done that I've always wanted to, and that's to host a Thanksgiving dinner for fellow expat Americans. I hope one day that'll happen.

In the meantime, I was actually wrong earlier in this post. I said that I don't want anything, and that's not true: I want everyone to experience love and happiness, and I want them to have one day a year when they can be truly thankful for it. You don't need a holiday for that, but it helps.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Episode 55 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Today I talk about being an expat, based largely on my own experience. I tell you somethings a new expat can expect to feel, both good and bad. I also tell you how it resolves itself, eventually turning into “home”. I also share some of my general feelings about being an expat and what that all means. After comments from Episode 54, I say a little about my Kiwi Thanksgiving. Finally it's a slightly revised version of my 30 second podcast promo. There may not be a podcast on Friday. We'll see.

Leave a comment here or send an email to me at amerinz{at)yahoo.com. You can also ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Monday, November 19, 2007

Embattled Australian Prime Minister John Howard chose a speech to a Korean Christian church in his electorate to imply that his conservative coalition government is more Christian, closer to his God, than the Opposition is:

"I'm not suggesting that God is either Liberal or Labor. He is neither. But I am suggesting that the influence of Christianity in such policies as families, individual responsibility ... personal choice and free enterprise sit very comfortably with the values of my party."

This isn't the first time Howard has tried to appeal to “Christian” voters. Previously he used the Karl Rove-like tactic of raising the spectre of same-sex marriage as a wedge issue. This time out, it looks like an act of desperation: Howard's coalition is trailing the Australian Labor Party in all opinion polls, some of which are indicating that Howard will lose his own electorate seat.

The Japanese whaling fleet set sail for their annual whale slaughter. This isn't new, of course, except this year they plan on ignoring a 40-year ban on slaughtering humpback whales.

No one in the civilised world takes Japan seriously when it claims to be conducting “scientific research” on whales, so why they persist in lying about what they're doing is beyond me. Maybe they're delusional.

This year, there will likely be human death in the waters of Antarctica, too. Greenpeace is pledging to disrupt the whale slaughter, and extremist groups are likely to show up, too, ones not reluctant to use violence. Under international law, New Zealand, as the closest nation to the slaughter, will be required to come to the aid of any stricken vessel. Ironic, isn't it? Japan openly flouts international law on whaling, but New Zealand will obey the rule of law to provide assistance at sea.

Japan is the very definition of hypocrisy when it denies that it's hunting and slaughtering whales. But it's also guilty of nationalistic hubris because apparently the reason they risk the enmity of the entire world is that they feel their culture is being threatened. Yes, and they normally put to sea in traditional whaling craft, don't they?

I am definitely not a supporter of animal rights activists. I'm not a vegetarian or vegan (I'm an omnivore, actually). But you don't have to be any of those things to see that slaughtering whales is just plain wrong, and Japan is lying about what it's doing.

It's time for the nations of the world start placing sanctions on Japan until they start obeying international law. Sadly, I don't expect that to happen. The slaughter will continue and some people will foolishly take violent action against the Japanese whaling fleet. And all over some lies about overblown nationalistic pride.

Sunday, November 18, 2007

This won't be even remotely surprising, but I think that far right christianists are funny. Maybe unintentionally, but funny nevertheless.

New Zealand's free-to-air TV3 has started airing the series “Californication” late in the evening during “adults only” time, and the frothing faithful have not been happy about it. Outraged calls to talkback radio followed the airing of the first episode, and the far right has demanded the show be pulled, along with the usual threats of boycotts of advertisers.

Sadly, some companies have apparently pulled their advertising, but the far right christianist group “Family First” is beside itself that the NZ Police has not pulled its advertising from the show. The group's head told the media, "Sadly and perhaps ironically, the police who advertised during the first episode and who are dealing with some of the increase in sexual crime, offensive language and behaviour and drug crimes promoted and normalised by this type of programme have said they are unwilling to remove their advertising."

Let's look at a couple bits of that for a little fun. He says the police are dealing with “increase in sexual crime...promoted and normalised by this type of programme”. Sexual activity is not the same thing a “sexual crime”, except to his group any activity outside of heterosexual marriage is sinful, and they probably think it should be a crime. He says the police are dealing with “offensive language”. Really? When did the NZ Police start arresting people for using blue language? I'd really like to know since nearly everyone I know could be at risk of arrest.

The point, of course, is that the programme doesn't “promote” any of the things the christiansts say it does. It depicts some of them, but that's not the same thing as promoting them. We adults are a bit more sophisticated and intelligent than the christianists give us credit for, and we don't take our television programmes to be guidebooks for living.

If the far right means to suggest that it influences children and youth—which is no more likely—despite it being aired during “adults only” time, then that's also none of their business. Parents have the ultimate responsibility for what their children watch on TV and it's weak of the christianists to demand that someone else do the hard work of censoring for them. The most powerful and effective tool for parental censorship is still the simplest: It's called the “off” switch.

To me, the offensiveness here is self-appointed, self-righteous “moral guardians” trying to decide what we can and cannot see on television. So, I'm going to engage in a “buycott” and go out of my way to support advertisers they're opposing. Still, just in case the wingnuts were telling the truth, I don't think I'll swear in front of a cop.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Episode 54 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

I begin with a few words about Tuesday's podcast. Then a couple domestic news items. It's confirmed: I'm a Big Giant Head, or I write like one. Then I talk a bit about the Australian election, and then how some Maori activists need to study public relations. I tell you about Episode 55, which will be largely based on a listener request. There probably won't be a podcast on Fridayof next week.

Be sure to vote in the poll on my blog!

Leave a comment, send an email to me at amerinz(at}yahoo.com, or ring my US listener line on 206-339-8413.

Ever since Eric over at Confessions of a etc., etc. told me to suck it over our podcast ranking rivalry, it's been war—war, I tell you! Well, the tables are turning.

Since he's switched his feed away from Podomatic, over the past few days my podcast has again become the number one ranked personal journal podcast on Podomatic's internal daily rankings. It's only a matter of time until I'm again number one overall (cue evil laugh).

So today, I go over to his site and see there's a thingee showing the “reading level” of his blog. “College (Undergrad)”, it said. Not bad. So then I followed the link and had my blog evaluated:

Little ol' me with only a bachelor of arts degree writing like a bleedin' genius. Ha! Of course a completely plausible explanation is that I'm just a pretentious queen with a good thesaurus. Nah, I'll take genius.

Update 18 November: After adding only two posts, the reading level of my blog dropped to "College (Postgrad)". Who knew a more conversational post and one somewhat fragmented post could have such a devastating effect? And so I must endeavour to raise the level of vocabulary in this venture so as to avoid further linguistic descent, however quixotic that effort may be revealed to be. (there, that should have raised the level a bit...)

Because fair is fair, turnabout is fairplay and all that, I bring you this story.

Yesterday I was doing my morning ablutions, and this particular day included using the hair clippers in the main bathroom. A little more fluffing about the house and I was ready to take my shower. There was no hot water. I tried running the taps to convince the continuous flow hot water heater to start up, but that failed, as it did at every other tap I tried (what's that I hear you muttering about the definition of insanity? Bah! I was just checking everything to narrow the problem).

After checking the taps, the next thing was to go to check the gas bottles (LPG) and the heater itself. I went outside in a pair of sweatpants and a towel draped over my shoulders so I didn't risk inflicting the ghastly vision of myself on the neighbours (who weren't there, anyway). The bottles were full (as they should have been, since they were just refilled). The gas heater looked normal. I flicked the power switch, just in case, tried all the taps again, still nothing.

I tried the kitchen tap, which is on its own gas heater, and that worked fine, so there was no problem with the gas. I also checked the circuit breaker to make sure that nothing was tripped.

So, having checked out everything I could think of, I rang the authorised service agent for the water heater. They were fully booked-out for the day, and probably Friday as well. When I told them we had no hot water, we went onto the “priority” list.

The guy arrived around 3.30 that afternoon, checked the heater and determined there was no power going to it (electricity is used to light the gas to heat the water as it's used; very energy-efficient, but it does need power). He told me to ring the power company to make sure there was no load management in the area (in which they send a signal to shut off electric water heaters to reduce electricity demand). The gas man thought that our gas heater might be hooked up to the power for the old electric hot water heater, and so, might be turned off. Turns out, there was no load management, so the gas man said I'd need to ring an electrician to find the fault.

Back on the phone. The first electrician couldn't come until the morning. The second couldn't come, but recommended another. He couldn't come, but recommended I try still another. At first, I wasn't impressed with him, if I'm honest, because after I explained the problem he was saying he didn't think it was a problem an electrician would work on, so I explained it a couple more times until he got it.

Then he asked, “Is there a power point in your bathroom?” (a power point is a called something like a “wall outlet” in America). There is. “Is it working?” I said I thought so, but I'd go check. As I walked, he explained that very often the electricity for water heaters is connected to the bathroom.

When I got there and looked, I immediately saw that the little blue breaker switch for the GFI circuit was tripped. I reset it, turned on the tap and the hot water returned. I told him he was the first person to mention that, he chuckled and said, “no charge!”

Apparently, the GFI breaker for the bathroom is the one in the power point; there's nothing in the main panel as there used to be. Because this has never happened before, I had no idea the electric ignition for the hot water heater was controlled by that breaker, but it makes sense because there's water there, after all. I also learned that the power for the en suite (“master bathroom” in Americanese) is also controlled by that GFI breaker. I hadn't noticed because I didn't use any power in there (the lights, of course, are on their own circuit).

Thinking back, I remember doing something very unusual for me: I unplugged the clippers while they were still running (normally, I switch them off, then switch off the power point and unplug the clippers). I have no idea why I did that, but it must have been enough to trip the breaker and I didn't notice or hear it (thinking back, again, I wonder if I did hear it pop, but it didn't register; or, is that just beating myself up?).

So, the whole thing was my fault. The cause was my own stupidity. I, too, do stupid things.

Since I spend so much time and so many words making fun of Bush and the neo-cons or the far right christianists, I thought it was only fair to make fun of myself. Clearly, nobody's perfect. C'est la vie.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

CNN is so busted! TMPtv (via TPM's Horse's Mouth site) has produced this video showing precisely how CNN, that supposed reputable source of news, used "creative editing" to make US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declare that "Congress hasn't done anything." Trouble is, that's not what she really said, her context was specific and her words didn't support the slant of CNN's story. What I don't get is how on earth CNN thought they could get away with this. If you want to know what's at the heart of my criticism of the mainstream news media, this video is pretty much a textbook example.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Bush is about to strike again, using a recess appointment to install arch-homophobe James Holsinger as Surgeon General (via Joe.My.God). Holsinger will be able to serve in the position until the end of 2008.

Holsinger gained notoriety for writing an incredibly stupid paper in which he claimed, among other things, that—like plumbing—humans only “fit” one way (male and female), sexually speaking, and anything else would inevitably lead to disease (no, I'm not making that up). He also founded a church, part of which is dedicated to the “ex-gay” scam.

Some would argue that recess appointments are a well-used tactic by presidents, and that's true. But using it to install as surgeon general a spectacularly unqualified, bigoted ideologue who couldn't win Congressional confirmation is as underhanded as it is despicable. But, then, we can expect nothing else from Bush.

Meanwhile, the US has set new records for sexual infections among heterosexuals. Apparently Holsinger will need a new plumber.

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Episode 53 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Jason's back (he was last on Episode 20) for an extra-long episode where we have a wide-ranging talk about all sorts of things relating to politics. We begin by talking about a theme Jason sometimes writes about on his blog, namely the way soldiers in Iraq tend to be forgotten, and about how if this is a war, how come only the soldiers and their families are called to sacrifice? The poor treatment of the soldiers is the fault of both Bush and Congress, and this has nothing to do with supporting the war itself.

Then it's on to a talk about Bush's assault on the Constitution and the foolishness of their actions. This leads into talk about torture and the “war” on terror.

After a brief interruption, it's on to the 2008 election, first up Ron Paul and his weird use of Guy Fawkes to raise money. Are Hillary's “negatives” real? Guiliani and others get a mention, too. I'm not a big fan of the presidential selection system, but I see some positive possibilities with the change in primary dates. Jason's less convinced. I tell you what I think historians will say is the great tragedy of the Bush administration.

We leave on a hopeful note, about how we can steer the world to a better place in many ways by moving away from fossil fuels and toward energy independence. Hey, I said it was a wide-ranging talk!

Leave a comment, or ring my US-based listener line, 206-339-8413. You can also send an email to me at amerinz[at}yahoo.com. Join my e-mailing list to find out when episodes are released.

Fellow American expat Darren, who with his wife Dawn was on my AmeriNZ Podcast episode 32, is taking part in Movember fundraiser (thanks to Dawn for blogging about this).

This annual event raises funds for the Prostate Cancer Foundation by having men gain sponsorship and grow a moustache (a “mo”) during the month of November. It began in Australia as a way of raising awareness of, and money for, men's health issues, and it's now spread across the planet.

And men's health issues need all the attention they can get. According to the Movember site, “Every year in New Zealand 2,656 men are diagnosed with prostate cancer and about 600 die of the disease, making prostate cancer the second largest cause of male cancer deaths, after lung cancer.”

In general, men are reluctant to see a doctor for any health issue, and probably nothing frightens men more than a prostate check. Yet if it's caught early, prostate cancer is treatable and often curable.

Movember seeks to raise awareness of men's health issues as well as raise funds. Again from the Movember site, “donations are made directly to the Prostate Cancer Foundation of New Zealand who will use the funds to create awareness, increase support networks for those men who suffer from prostate cancer, fund research and scholarship programs.”

It's a great cause, and a solid, recognisable and effective charity, but one we've never supported before.

So this year, Nigel and I are sponsoring Darren, and you can, too, by going to his “Sponsor a Mo” page (then just click on the little blue “Sponsor” link). All donations over $5 are tax-deductible within New Zealand; I have no idea what the rules are for overseas donors, but should that really be the main concern?

Movember is a bit of fun with a serious and positive result. I hope you'll join us in sponsoring Darren.

Apparently, “power naps” ranging from 5 to no more than 30 minutes (depending on the person) have benefits including “enhanced cognitive function, better reaction time, more patience, stress relief, and better overall health,” as well as being “one of the best ways to lower stress on your heart”.

In societies descended from Northern Europe, napping is seen as a sign of sloth. Yet there have been many famous people who napped, including “some of the best minds in history, such as Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, and Thomas Edison”. Those people were certainly not lazy slackers.

In a post last February, I mentioned a CBS News report that 15 percent of 24-hour US companies were encouraging naps. So, at least some companies see the value of napping.

Even so, despite the evidence of napping's benefits, the examples of highly-productive nappers and the companies that value both, I don't expect our culture as a whole to suddenly see the light. I used to share that dominant view. When I was younger, I hated the idea of napping and thought it was a waste of time. Now that I'm a bit older, I see the attraction as well as the value—and I find naps come much easier than they used to.

At least now I can say that I'm working on my health—as long as it's not at work, of course.

Monday, November 12, 2007

A couple weeks ago, a company came and erected scaffolding (pictured—it's about three storeys high at the far end). And there it sat.

Last week, the plasterer came to repair the damage from when the tree fell and scraped down the back of the house. A few days later, the painter came to paint the repaired plaster (if you look under the window toward the middle of the photo, you may see a shiny, lighter area; that's the new paint, which the painter said will fade to match the look of the existing paint. The colour is a great match, despite what the photo makes it look like).

Today, the roofers came and replaced the damaged bits of roofing iron (which is actually steel, but that's another story). The roofing material has been sitting in the little courtyard next to the garage (intended for additional parking or for a boat or something) for the better part of a month. It was delivered by a big truck with a crane to lift it off and lay it on the ground.

On Wednesday, another contractor (the fifth, if you count the scaffolding company) is due to come and install the spouting (what we called “guttering” in America). And then, the repairs will be complete. The scaffolding will be removed soon after that and then, finally, it'll all be done.

Four months later.

Jake's pleased to get that courtyard back, unobstructed. Okay, so I have no idea if he's pleased or not, but I would be if I were him. Or, maybe not.

The main thing is that these repairs are nearly done. I'd be quite happy if this was our once-in-a-lifetime encounter with storm damage, but somehow I doubt we'll be that lucky.

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Today is a special day in history. On the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month, 1918, at Compiègne, France, hostilities on the Western Front of World War One officially ended when an armistice was signed. Hostilities in other areas continued for awhile afterward, and the war didn't actually end until the infamous Treaty of Versailles was signed the following year.

The allied nations, including the US and the British Empire, once observed this day as Armistice Day, but after World War Two it became Veterans' Day in the US and Remembrance Day in the British Empire. Many Commonwealth countries continue to observe Remembrance Day, and some people continue to have two minutes silence at 11am.

The day is longer the main war remembrance day in New Zealand or Australia, having been overshadowed by Anzac Day. But pretty much wherever you go in New Zealand you'll find a war memorial, especially to “The Glorious Dead” of World War One. New Zealand's suffering and loss from that war was horrific.

It bothers me sometimes that the horror and utter pointlessness of World War One is often forgotten in modern times, especially in the US where it's increasingly being forgotten. Yet that war ushered in the twentieth century and its unprecedented thirst for blood spilled in war. So far in the twenty first century we haven't managed to equal the horror and evil of the last century, but maybe that's just from lack of opportunity.

It's World War One—its futility, its devastation and the arrogance of the people who started it—that I think of when the current American administration rattles their sabres, as it is so keen to do, and especially when little Bush talks of World War Three.

As the saying goes, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Maybe we all need Remembrance Day.

Photo: This photograph was taken in the forest of Compiègne after reaching an agreement for the armistice that ended World War I. This railcar was given to Ferdinand Foch for military use by the manufacturer, Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits. Foch is second from the right. (Photo caption text and image from Wikipedia).

Friday, November 09, 2007

Episode 52 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Finally, a shorter episode! I recorded today during my lunch break (don't worry, there aren't any eating sounds). Today I catch-up on the things I didn't time for over the past week, like comments, but I also give you updates on some things I've talked about on earlier episodes.

Any Australians want to take part in an episode? Let me know. I tell you about some upcoming episodes, and a couple things about earlier ones. What's my most-downloaded episode to date? I'm planning another guest show for Tuesday.

I'm also a guest on ArcherRadio Group Shows for Thursday and Friday of this week.

Leave a comment, or ring my US-based listener line, 206-339-8413. You can also send an email to me at amerinz[at}yahoo.com.

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Episode 51 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

Oh! Canada! It's an extra long episode today, as I talk with Mark from one of my favourite sites, Slap Upside the Head. Mark is Canadian, currently living in Montreal. We talk about all sorts of things, like his growing up in Canada, and something of what the country is like. Are gay rights really better in Canada? What can the Canadian experience teach American activists? We fit in some talk about terrorism, the influence of right wing religionists, and even sports! Canada, the US and New Zealand all get some compare and contrast action.

Leave a comment or call my US listener line on 206-339-8413. And, you can always send an email to me at amerinz(at]yahoo.com. Join my e-mailing list to find out about new episodes as they're released.

Monday, November 05, 2007

It may be that Guy Fawkes is fading in New Zealand. Last year, I wrote how I just don't get its relevance here.

It essentially celebrates the foiling of a plot by Catholics to topple the Protestant King of England and the Protestant aristocracy. Given its focus on the English monarchy and ruling elite (England at the time offered very little power to common people) along with its strong anti-Catholic message, what relevance does that have to modern New Zealand?

Of course, to modern New Zealanders (especially those born here), Guy Fawkes is nothing more than a fireworks extravaganza. The historic roots, having so little relevance here, are largely ignored. But the last remaining tenuous link with England's Guy Fawkes Day may soon be broken.

This year, the government shortened the sale period for fireworks from 10 days to four days prior to Guy Fawkes (November 5), and raised the purchase age from 14 to 18. A complete ban is still possible, as the Fire Service and SPCA want, but the government may wait and see how this year went. It's been a cool, rainy weekend over most of New Zealand, and that's helped reduce the risk of fires.

Ironically, there were injuries this year at official public fireworks displays, long promoted as an alternative to personal fireworks. Taken together—these injuries and the wet weather—I'd guess that Guy Fawkes will probably limp along for a couple more years, but I say it's inevitable that one day people in New Zealand will no longer “remember, remember the fifth of November.”

Saturday, November 03, 2007

Episode 50 is now available, and it's free no matter where you get it from. You can listen to it or download it through the player at the bottom of the post here, or subscribe for free through iTunes here (you must have the free iTunes player installed). You can also listen to it for free through the player on my MySpace page.

This is the 50th episode of the AmeriNZ Podcast! I also commemorate the twelfth anniversary of my arrival in New Zealand to live, and it's the date Nigel and I take as our anniversary, too.

Today, I share some memories of my arrival in NZ. I also give you a behind-the-scenes look at what went into the creation of my podcast. I then have comments, before moving on to some time with Nigel. Intermixed are phone messages I received, plus plenty of things I've never played publicly before.

I also move the curtain so you can see some of the behind-the-scenes magic. The jet landing sound effect has been part of the intro since episode one, as has the Morse Code. I also tell you about some of what led to the creation of the podcast.

Thanks for your support over the first 50 episodes! I hope to make the next 50 better and better.